A legal battle over control of a historic church has culminated in a court ruling that dismisses the claims of a pastor who sought to challenge the legitimacy of the church's executive board. The complaint, filed by Michael A. Gonzalez in Los Angeles County Superior Court on November 2020 against Gethsemani Church and several individual defendants, was ultimately rejected by Judge Stephanie M. Bowick.
Michael A. Gonzalez, a pastor and member of Gethsemani Church, alleged that the current executive board members were not elected according to the church’s bylaws and had wrongfully asserted control over the church and its property. He claimed that Frances Gonzalez, Miguel Gonzalez, and Carlos Gonzalez were appointed without proper authority and subsequently sold church property illegally. Michael sought various remedies including judicial determination of election validity, appointment of a receiver, constructive trust, declaratory relief, and an accounting.
In his cross-complaint, Michael detailed how the church's bylaws stipulate that its executive board should be elected through a "Great Annual Assembly" comprising executive directors, ordained ministers, licensed ministers, and delegates from branch churches. However, he argued that Frances Gonzalez was appointed by the previous president without an election and then appointed Miguel and Carlos to their positions without following due process.
The trial court sustained a demurrer filed by the defendants on standing grounds. The court found that Michael lacked authority to bring an action on behalf of the church as he did not allege any individualized harm or show he had voting rights within the church’s governance structure. Judge Bowick noted that Michael failed to meet his burden to amend his pleading sufficiently to state a cause of action under any legal theory.
Michael’s cross-complaint included nine causes of action: judicial determination of election validity under Corporations Code section 9418; breach of fiduciary duty; appointment of receiver under Code of Civil Procedure section 564; violation of Corporations Code section 9412; conversion; constructive trust; declaratory relief; accounting; and violation of Corporations Code section 9631. Each cause was brought both individually and on behalf of the church.
However, each claim was dismissed due to lack of standing or failure to allege individualized harm. For instance, Michael’s claim for breach of fiduciary duty failed because it only pertained to duties owed to the church rather than himself personally. Similarly, his request for declaratory relief was denied as it essentially repeated his earlier claims about election validity which he lacked standing to pursue.
The appellate court and Justices Viramontes, Stratton and Grimes affirmed this decision upon review. They concluded that there was no reasonable possibility for amendment that could cure these defects in Michael's pleading. As such, they upheld Judge Bowick's ruling denying leave to amend.
Representing Michael A. Gonzalez were attorneys from Dickson & Dickson with Robert M. Dickson leading the case while Schorr Law’s Zachary D. Schorr and Carina Woo represented Gethsemani Church along with other individual respondents Frances Gonzalez, Miguel Gonzalez, and Carlos Gonzalez.